retitle 786902 ITA: ifupdown -- high level tools to configure network
owner 786902 !
thanks
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 05:45:22PM +0200, Andrew Shadura wrote:
This is that time of the year when I finally need to orphan ifupdown
package. It's been quite some time already since I first thought
On 5/30/15, 7:24 AM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On May 30, Dmitry Smirnov only...@debian.org wrote:
I'm not yet sure what can replace ifupdown in bonded NIC configurations with
ifenslave...
I am not sure about the obsolete bonding driver, but NM supports the new
teaming driver. [1]
systemd-networkd
On Sat, 30 May 2015 16:24:35 Marco d'Itri wrote:
On May 30, Dmitry Smirnov only...@debian.org wrote:
I'm not yet sure what can replace ifupdown in bonded NIC configurations
with ifenslave...
I am not sure about the obsolete bonding driver,
I wouldn't rush to label our ifenslave as
On May 30, Dmitry Smirnov only...@debian.org wrote:
I'm not yet sure what can replace ifupdown in bonded NIC configurations
with
ifenslave...
I am not sure about the obsolete bonding driver, but NM supports the new
teaming driver. [1]
systemd-networkd support is planned but not being
Am 29.05.2015 um 06:59 schrieb roopa:
ifupdown did pose a few challenges to manage interfaces at the scale we
deploy (sometimes more than 2000 interfaces
bridges/bonds etc). But we loved the extensibility and modularity it
provided.
And the only difficulty continuing with ifupdown was
On 27/05/15 21:12, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 20:50 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
I don't think ifupdown has been Debian's native tool for several years
now. It is one among several available tools, and happens to be the only
one with Debian as its upstream; on a
On 5/29/15, 1:44 AM, Michael Biebl wrote:
Am 29.05.2015 um 06:59 schrieb roopa:
ifupdown did pose a few challenges to manage interfaces at the scale we
deploy (sometimes more than 2000 interfaces
bridges/bonds etc). But we loved the extensibility and modularity it
provided.
And the only
On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 16:17 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
And I guess it's rather uncommon on Debian to use NM e.g. on server
systems (probably also because most people wonder why they need a
bloated daemon/etc. running just for a network that is brought up/down
once every nnn days)
Maybe,
On Fri, 29 May 2015 14:02:04 Simon McVittie wrote:
In other words, ifupdown is one choice among many - on wheezy/jessie
servers I currently choose ifupdown (although I should try out
systemd-networkd at some point), but on laptops where I've chosen to use
NM, the only reason ifupdown is still
On May 27, Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net wrote:
And I guess it's rather uncommon on Debian to use NM e.g. on server
systems (probably also because most people wonder why they need a
bloated daemon/etc. running just for a network that is brought up/down
once every nnn days)
On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 21:59 -0700, roopa wrote:
We plan to post it for inclusion as an alternative to ifupdown (using
the debian alternatives infrastructure), hoping to make it easier
for people who may be interested in trying it out.
Please see this page for how to get ifupdown2 into
On 5/28/15, 10:05 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 21:59 -0700, roopa wrote:
We plan to post it for inclusion as an alternative to ifupdown (using
the debian alternatives infrastructure), hoping to make it easier
for people who may be interested in trying it out.
Please see this
On 5/27/15, 8:18 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Haven't tried systemd-networkd yet, but at least NM fails in even very
simple cases (like resolving is broken, when I disconnect the wire and
go back to wifi, etc. pp.) ... plus the whole
On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 11:18 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
Haven't tried systemd-networkd yet, but at least NM fails in even very
simple cases (like resolving is broken, when I disconnect the wire and
go back to wifi, etc. pp.) ... plus the whole design, that it tries to
be the canonical
On May 27, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote:
a featureful systemd-networkd.
Will that make NetworkManager obsolete or will there be cases where it
will still be needed?
I am not sure that there is a clear plan about this: when this question
was asked at FOSDEM the answer was a bit vague. :-)
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Russell Stuart wrote:
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 12:33 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
(I am shocked, shocked that there is no flood of people here rushing to
save ifupdown... :-) )
Until systemd-networkd can run scripts on events no defence is required.
Your mail is
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 12:33 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
(I am shocked, shocked that there is no flood of people here rushing to
save ifupdown... :-) )
Until systemd-networkd can run scripts on events no defence is required.
It would be like comparing a calculator to a computer. Sure, the
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 19:27 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
Your mail is missing some things:
To: 786...@bugs.debian.org
Control: retitle -1 ITA: ifupdown -- high level tools to configure
network interfaces
Control: owner -1 !
If you mean it has been orphaned, it will work for while yet even if it
Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it wrote:
I do not expect systemd-networkd taking over NM when an interaction
with
a GUI is needed, but OTOH I see no reason to use NM on servers when
(recent) systemd-networkd is available, since it is much leaner.
In the current state of
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 12:33 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
(I am shocked, shocked that there is no flood of people here rushing to
save ifupdown... :-) )
Perhaps people are just tired of flame wars... (for now...) ;)
However, I hope ifupdown is going to live on. Or are there any plans to
replace
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 4:18 AM, Russell Stuart
russell-deb...@stuart.id.au wrote:
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 12:33 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
(I am shocked, shocked that there is no flood of people here rushing to
save ifupdown... :-) )
Until systemd-networkd can run scripts on events no defence
On 27/05/15 18:41, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
However, I hope ifupdown is going to live on. Or are there any plans to
replace Debian's native tool?
I don't think ifupdown has been Debian's native tool for several years
now. It is one among several available tools, and happens to be the
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 20:50 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
I don't think ifupdown has been Debian's native tool for several years
now. It is one among several available tools, and happens to be the only
one with Debian as its upstream; on a wheezy-era sysvinit system that
uses NetworkManager
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 22:12 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 20:50 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
I don't think ifupdown has been Debian's native tool for several years
now. It is one among several available tools, and happens to be the only
one with Debian as its
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 22:12 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 20:50 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
I don't think ifupdown has been Debian's native tool for several years
now. It is one among several available tools, and happens to be the only
one with Debian as its
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 05:06:38PM -0700, Cameron Norman wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote:
Simon McVittie wrote:
One thing that an adopter could very usefully do with
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Haven't tried systemd-networkd yet, but at least NM fails in even very
simple cases (like resolving is broken, when I disconnect the wire and
go back to wifi, etc. pp.) ... plus the whole design, that it tries to
be the
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote:
Simon McVittie wrote:
One thing that an adopter could very usefully do with ifupdown would be
to coordinate with the systemd maintainers on moving net.agent
(Debian-specific udev glue to invoke ifupdown) from udev into
Simon McVittie wrote:
I don't think ifupdown has been Debian's native tool for several years
now. It is one among several available tools, and happens to be the only
one with Debian as its upstream; on a wheezy-era sysvinit system that
uses NetworkManager, the only thing ifupdown does for you
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 05:06:38PM -0700, Cameron Norman wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote:
Simon McVittie wrote:
One thing that an adopter could very usefully do with ifupdown would be
to coordinate with the systemd maintainers on moving
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 12:54 AM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
a featureful systemd-networkd.
Will that make NetworkManager obsolete or will there be cases where it
will still be needed?
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
Hello,
This is that time of the year when I finally need to orphan ifupdown
package. It's been quite some time already since I first thought about
this, and I have finally understood I have no intent to maintain this
On May 26, Andrew Shadura andre...@debian.org wrote:
In current state ifupdown is probably good enough for what it is used
for, except a few bugs. For advanced uses, it seems, Python-based
ifupdown2 may become a good alternative in the future, and some simpler
things wicd, NM and
Hello,
On Tue, 26 May 2015 18:54:53 +0200
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
Maybe this is the right time to think hard about what we should do
about network configuration: Red Hat proposes NM for both desktop and
servers (even if they still support their legacy shell scripts), and
in
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 18:54 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On May 26, Andrew Shadura andre...@debian.org wrote:
In current state ifupdown is probably good enough for what it is used
for, except a few bugs. For advanced uses, it seems, Python-based
ifupdown2 may become a good alternative in
35 matches
Mail list logo
